Do you understand yourself well without typology?

[Caw the rooks]

Do you have difficulty with achieving satisfactory self-understanding without a categorizing system?

Personally I know and understand myself via introspecting but cannot do so well with applying myself to an external system. I understand that many come to a typology such as MBTI so they can understand themselves better.

So: would you have a difficult time with understanding yourself without a typological framework in which you can categorize your traits? Is it necessary to have this framework to quantify how you function, or is it mere interest that brought you to them?

 

[Tem]

Do you have difficulty with achieving satisfactory self-understanding without a categorizing system?

Personally I know and understand myself via introspecting but cannot do so well with applying myself to an external system. I understand that many come to a typology such as MBTI so they can understand themselves better.

So: would you have a difficult time with understanding yourself without a typological framework in which you can categorize your traits? Is it necessary to have this framework to quantify how you function, or is it mere interest that brought you to them?

This is a great thread.

You are right -- I absolutely cling on to external frameworks in order to better understand myself and others. I have to actively stop myself from doing this many times to remember that people are far more vibrant and wholesome than a set of characteristics or categories.

I understand myself by disagreeing with others -- it's through conflict and action that I start hearing my own voice, otherwise I begin to feel like I melt into my surroundings. It's in the times I feel melted into my surroundings that I reach out to external frameworks as a reference point for understanding individuals including myself.

 

[Caw the rooks]

You are right -- I absolutely cling on to external frameworks in order to better understand myself and others. I have to actively stop myself from doing this many times to remember that people are far more vibrant and wholesome than a set of characteristics or categories.

So do you have a hard time identifying with or appreciating people because of themselves as a whole rather than their set of characteristics? I see you identify with INTJ; so this would be a manifestation of Te. I wonder if those that identify with Te > Ti will have an easier time working with these systems. It seems logical that these types would naturally be attuned to finding use and working within their paradigms.

I understand myself by disagreeing with others -- it's through conflict and action that I start hearing my own voice, otherwise I begin to feel like I melt into my surroundings. It's in the times I feel melted into my surroundings that I reach out to external frameworks as a reference point for understanding individuals including myself.

That's interesting... so it's almost like a source of control, and perhaps comfort, for you? You latch onto these external systems to keep you stable?

 

[Keirouen]

It's a mere interest that I let heavily influence me. I got into mbti when I was about 13.

The thing with me is I've always been a reflective, withdrawn, inquisitive, and intellectual girl.

I've always known I'm not like most people. I stand out in both good and bad ways. I can blend into the crowd but as soon as we start talking it's pretty immediate. You can tell I'm not like any girl you've met. Either you really like this or you're seriously weirded out

I don't even think mbti fully captures me with all my quirks and inconsistencies. Mbti is a nice tool but it is only a small piece to the puzzle of who you are

 

[prplchknz]

I think i understand myself better without an external system. with that being said as soon as i describe myself accurately I become the opposite. So I can't tell you about myself.

 

[Caw the rooks]

It's a mere interest that I let heavily influence me. I got into mbti when I was about 13.

The thing with me is I've always been a reflective, withdrawn, inquisitive, and intellectual girl.

I've always known I'm not like most people. I stand out in both good and bad ways. I can blend into the crowd but as soon as we start talking it's pretty immediate. You can tell I'm not like any girl you've met. Either you really like this or you're seriously weirded out

I guess typology is especially helpful to those like you; different, perhaps doesn't quite fit in. Someone like that would like to understand just why this is! And typology gives a quantifiable, accessible answer to the question.

I don't even think mbti fully captures me with all my quirks and inconsistencies. Mbti is a nice tool but it is only a small piece to the puzzle of who you are

Ah, you can't expect it to. My analogy is that MBTI is like a blurry photograph. You get the general outline of what it is you just took a picture of, but most of the details are left out. You can tell it's a sycamore tree, rather than a willow, but not really what makes this sycamore tree different to other ones.

 

[Alea_iacta_est]

I understand myself fairly well. But JCF and Socionics transcend my understanding of self and allow me to pin-point exact qualities that define me.

 

[Caw the rooks]

I think i understand myself better without an external system. with that being said as soon as i describe myself accurately I become the opposite. So I can't tell you about myself.

Lol... perhaps you are both, if you can become both. Fire and ice entangled in a sweet embrace!

I understand myself fairly well. But JCF and Socionics transcend my understanding of self and allow me to pin-point exact qualities that define me.

That seems very reasonable. I think that is probably the best way to use the systems, for precision and betterment of your own independent understanding.

 

[prplchknz]

Lol... perhaps you are both, if you can become both. Fire and ice entangled in a sweet embrace!

oh so I'm water. Actually that makes sense I'm fluid get through crowds with ease and i'm not noticed when seeping through cracks. until i drip on someone's head

 

[Caw the rooks]

oh so I'm water. Actually that makes sense I'm fluid get through crowds with ease and i'm not noticed when seeping through cracks. until i drip on someone's head

The great paradox is that you are not water, you are fire and ice, together. Do you feel invisible to others then?

 

[prplchknz]

The great paradox is that you are not water, you are fire and ice, together. Do you feel invisible to others then?

I do, but you aren't understanding. I have qualities of water I've always been drawn to water for as long as I can remember

 

[á´…eparted]

Despite what others might think, typology systems have not helped me better to understand myself. I didn't seek them to acheive that either. All they did was make thing appear in a nice little package with a pretty label; that is the entirety of why I got sucked into it. It was pretty, and felt nice. Everything else remained exactly the same. If anything, in the years past typology was really misleading and lead me astray. Seeing myself in false light and focusing on minutia aspects of my personality. I used to take typology way too seriously years back.

While I need external references to understand where I am at and where I stand with things i.e. how good I am at something, how smart I am, how attractive I am, etc. I loathe just creating something out of thin air using only myself without anything to bounce off. However, I don't require some sort of created labeling system to do it. It's an organic process to me. In fact, I find it restrictive into understanding myself if I have to use a labeling system to understand myself. It misses the big picture. I don't need it in day to day life either. I get what I need from just being around others.

Ultimately, I just see it as a fun label system.

 

[PancakeMix]

I don't think I can understand myself without an external system since I never feel like I can describe or understand myself accurately. Not just with mbti, but I've also looked into horoscope in order to better understand myself. At the current moment I don't feel like I have an accurate perception of myself so that's why I rely on other sources to tell me so. I find it to be a lot easier with external sources since all you have to do is point and say "Omg that's exactly how I am!"

 

[Caw the rooks]

I do, but you aren't understanding. I have qualities of water I've always been drawn to water for as long as I can remember

Ah, okay. It's interesting how we create these associations, I wonder where they come from.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

Possibly. Maybe not. Maybe I'd come to the same realizations faster/slower without typology.

I don't let it dictate my major life decisions (i.e. I shouldn't apply for that job because X type isn't supposed to be very good at that profession), but at the very least, a better understanding of the JCF has helped me to better understand some of my idiosyncrasies and why I might not perceive the world the same as every single other individual. With any typology system there is always the danger of putting one's self and others into boxes, but it can be a useful tool for growth and development of cognitive ability, if properly utilized.

 

[Caw the rooks]

Despite what others might think, typology systems have not helped me better to understand myself. I didn't seek them to acheive that either. All they did was make thing appear in a nice little package with a pretty label; that is the entirety of why I got sucked into it. It was pretty, and felt nice. Everything else remained exactly the same. If anything, in the years past typology was really misleading and lead me astray. Seeing myself in false light and focusing on minutia aspects of my personality. I used to take typology way too seriously years back.

That is a very similar to my situation with it as well. A little badge... yes. Now though it's more about analyzing the system rather than myself. That's a problem with typology, I think: people sometimes take their type too seriously and even try to fit with the stereotype by adjusting behavior. I've seen people change their type and then change how they act to correspond to it!

While I need external references to understand where I am at and where I stand with things i.e. how good I am at something, how smart I am, how attractive I am, etc. I loathe just creating something out of thin air using only myself without anything to bounce off. However, I don't require some sort of created labeling system to do it. It's an organic process to me. In fact, I find it restrictive into understanding myself if I have to use a labeling system to understand myself. It misses the big picture. I don't need it in day to day life either. I get what I need from just being around others.

Ultimately, I just see it as a fun label system.

Do you really get much use of out it then? Do you see it as worthwhile to continue your interest in it, really?

I don't think I can understand myself without an external system since I never feel like I can describe or understand myself accurately. Not just with mbti, but I've also looked into horoscope in order to better understand myself. At the current moment I don't feel like I have an accurate perception of myself so that's why I rely on other sources to tell me so. I find it to be a lot easier with external sources since all you have to do is point and say "Omg that's exactly how I am!"

The problem with that is all the biases your mind conjures to fit with what the sources say... it's not really you is it? Self-analysis after an even, after you have made some significant decision and taken action, I find to be very useful in finding out your self. Why did you do this, what lead you to it etc. Then you begin to build up a picture.

I don't let it dictate my major life decisions (i.e. I shouldn't apply for that job because X type isn't supposed to be very good at that profession)

Yeah, that's pretty much the worst way to utilize it IMO. Especially for jobs... why would it matter then, if you wanted to do something? To be honest, when does it matter at all, in the real world.

 

[HongDou]

Yes, but typology gives me a way to categorize all the various parts of my personality cleanly. Of course, the times I differentiate from the information given to me I just realize is a part of me that doesn't mesh with the theory.

 

[Noll]

A lot of the times I think that people on this forum feel the constant need to always live up to the stereotypes of what type they are. I'm not sure if I like the Enneagram very much anymore, I'd prefer it with a lot of blanks like MBTI. Tritypes is what ruins it in my opinion. There's a difference between understanding self and being all obsessed with a new age, pseudoscience psychology that lacks actual scientific ground.

 

[Opal]

When I was younger I was convinced I understood myself perfectly. In later, more ambiguous years I sought external, objective metrics for perspective. Learning MBTI and Enneagram fundamentals has made me warmer and more understanding, and has fueled a lot of useful introspection.

So, in response to the OP, no, they are not necessary, but I find the stable objectivity they offer comforting.

 

[indra]

to control a demon is to know its name

through study, phenomenon is transferred into the noumenal, and with perfect clarity ascription is on employ